AllenLowe

I'm with Nate on this - one problem, of course, is that to say "avant garde" is to refer to so many different players and styles that it's difficult to generalize in an accurate way - but Nate's analysis is perfect. I would add that avant gardists, like modernists in any form (literature, theater, film) are trying to replace outmoded gestures and worn out forms, to substitute the new for the easily identifiable and thus predictable cadences of an older way of creating. Audiences tend to prefer that with which they are already familiar. But forms like music will die if they are not constantly renewed - the other thing to realize is that even much more conservative jazz musicians are positively efected by the avant garde, borrowing its techniques and certain means of its expression for their own much more conventional purposes.

I was conected to Crumb by Harvey Pekar, who loved my jazz history, but nothing ever came of it - and Pekar himself is completely uncommunicative these days - I think he's upset that he's gotten so famous and thinks everyone wants something from him - I admire some of what Tosches has done but I find too much flash there, less substance at the core than I would like - I would have to buy the Emmett Miller book again and do some itemization about errors, etc, but unfortunately can't do it now. It's a good idea, though. I like Fahey more for his conception and ambition than execution - I keep thinking, when listening to him, that I wish there was just a little bit more there - but honestly it's been some time since I listened closely -

Wel, a lot to respond to , but I'll do my best - honestly I don't like Tosches, too flashy, not enough real knowledge, but we'll have to agree to discagree here, as with Francis - I have had very little mainstream success with getting published, and some downright rotten luck: First book, American Pop, published by Cadence, good, honest people but little distribution. Second book, That Devilin Tune published 2002 by Music and Arts and than frozen in time - delays in getting out the boxed CD set that is supposed to accompany it (I spent nearly 2 years mastering that sucker), but I am told they are finally getting ready to put the whole package together. I certainly hope so but am worried about the condition of mastering CDRs that are almost three years old. 1 Third Book - Jazz of the 1950s: Sheldon Meyer was very interested in it at Oxford, but it got turned down in peer review, including rejection by one reviewer who advised that he was mentioned prominently in the book - I yelled and howled to the editor (a complete idiot)that this was a conflict of interest, got a nice, shit-filled twinky of a letter from the head of the press, but no book. The editor was fired right after this. My bad luck. I think I have a publisher now, but will know more in a few months. Still editing and re-writing. Last book- history of rock and roll 1950-1970 - nasty rejection by U of Illinois - Burton Peretti, I found out, was one of the reviewers - I responded to these guys who reviewed it, but I got a sense that 1) they had political problems with the book and 2) they knew and did not like my prior work. Politically I deal very honestly and forthrightly with racial issues and I admire the music on its own terms, not as "whitewashed" r&B, which is the prevailing academic attitude. I was previously advised by U California that the work would be politically unacceptable to their board, and by the editor of U North Carolina that I was full of shit. I tended to disagree. I have found a small publisher for 2006 and they will include a CD with the book that I will master - so as you can see I have not had a lot of luck - DaCapo has turned down every one of these books, Routledge has turned down the last two. I feel like I've done some important work, but it's getting harder and harder to justify the time spent on these projects -

JSNGRY: RE- Bobby Short - he drove me a little crazy at first - but as I did more research into the hisotry of American song, he began to sound much more within the tradition to me - not that that necessarily is a good thing, but I began to acquire a taste for his style, which fell anywhere from vaudeville to early pop - I found his means of expression to be quite deep and satisfyingly broad in its references - hope this helps -

Iwas actually, initially, thinking of the first post-Parker generation, the guys who felt the most immediate influence, but the more the merrier. And yes, Strozier is black -

Sudhalter - loaded question - extremely knowledgeable guy with a racial chip on his shoulder - has spent too much time arguing, in my opinion, that both whites and blacks are equally responsible for the origins of jazz. I think that opinion is indefensible and has occured to him because he knows next to nothing about the 19th century and developments prior to jazz. Still, I like Lost Chords and think he has made worthy attempts to revive the reputatrions of musicans like Miff Mole, Jack Purvis, et al, musicians whom I admire hugely and who, indeed, I feel have been neglected out of a misguided type of critical liberalism. But stll...I think he doth protesteth too much; lost chords has, as well, some silly critical brickbats aimed at specific black musicians which I feel can be interpreted as racist - to get more detail I'll need some time to go through my copy... Tosches is interesting and I believe is a good writer whose historical knowledge has some unfortunate gaps. There are historical probelms in Country, and I found his Emmett Miller book riddled with errors or questionable statements - once again I can't give citations right now, and I hate to make this a kind of hit-and-run criticism - I no longer have my copy of the Emmett Miller book, however, as it annoyed me so much I returned it. I think Tosches does have a tendency to over-inflate his opinions -

there's also John La Porta -

We always talk about the white/Lester Young/tenor sax disciples - but it's equally interesting to me to look at the white alto heirs of Bird, as I think thay are as good and maybe even more distintive: hence: Dave Schildkraut, Joe Maini, Gene Quill, Phil Woods, Lee Konitz, Charlie Mariano - must be more but I work a brain deadening job and am having trouble replacing those lost brain cells -

This is interesting and it brings to mind some things I thought when I first heard Ira Sullivan in person in the 1980s - this was in the middle of Marsalis's battles about the tradition vs more modern styles of playing - and I remember thinking about Sullivan - "This guys plays bebop like none of the young Lions, because he has nothing to prove - and it doesn't matter that he's 30-40 years older - he has more to say and says it more interestingly." Same with Mariano - nothing to prove, he just plays, doesn't have to show he knows changes or bebop because he's already paid those dues. And so he illustrates how that language can be kept alive and current (he's also a very nice and unassuming man, from a few conversations I had with him - which is icing on the cake) -

Re- mintrelsy - I have not read the Appel book; I am pretty certain, however, that his idea of mintrelsy is much different than mine. It is a complicated subject, but suffice to say that I think he may be right, if for all the wrong reasons. In Armstrong's formative years, one of the most important Southern vehicles of entertainment was the medicine show, a traveling performing circus of song and dance and a close relative of the misntrel show. I have no doubt that his attitudes about entertainment and audience were at least partially shaped by that format; more likely they were powerfully shaped. This would take a full essay, but mintrelsey has been documented to have much stronger ties to 19th century African American music and dance than were previously thought; also, see my last post, as many of the archtypes, both comedic and musical, that we associate with early and later jazz/comedy/entertainment may indeed have origins in minstrelsy. Minstrelsy also provided a forum for early professional songwriters; it also employed instruemntal techniques (vocal with improvised obligatto) that are very much related to Armstrong and jazz. It is likely, as I said, that Appel knows little or nothing of this, and so was correct for the wrong reasons. I certainly don't agree that you HAVE to consider misntrelsy when you consider Armstrong, only that, if you are going to deal with certain aspects of his art, it helps to have some real knowledge of minstrelsy. It is a lot more than blackface and stereotypes, but related to attitudes and approaches, and I believe this is where it fits Armstrong's methods -

Sorry to take so long to answer - my quote was from Joe Albany, my favorite degenerate junkie - nice guy and funny to boot -

Here another one, as well: "You know what they should call my autobiography: 'I Licked Bird's Blood." When we used to shoot up together, Bird would take the needle out of his arm and hand it to me. Before I could use it, I had to wipe the blood from the needle with my finger, after which I had to lick it off."

thanks! Now - who is that famous collector who won't give up the 6 minutes? And did jack Towers do the original transfers of these acetates? I know it's all none of my business, but I do restoration work myself and was just curious - (and did I mention that I own some un-released Mrs. Miller? I'm waiting until it's really worth a lot)-

thanks - had me worried there for a minute -

I apologize if this is old news, as I think it is - I just heard the story about a 1945 Town Hall concert release of Bird and Diz, with Al Haig - and that it's going to be put out by Bob Sonnenblick. I trtied to search it here, but came up empty handed. Can anyone help? thanks -

Hey - I thought I was Chuck Nessa -

Bobby Short - and, after seeing the film Festival Express, Janis Joplin (used to hate her singing) -

Armstrong did, by some accounts, admire Lombardo's sax sound (I can't take credit for this) - if, however, you want to hear an excellent Lombardo jazz performance, try St. Louis Blues, from 1930 - it actually swings!

And per Simone Weil's comments - intuition and instinct is indeed mysterious - why does one come up with good ideas (or bad ideas)? My prime point in all of this is that it's hopeless, in this process, to try and separate the intellectual from the emotional or intuitive - as they all contribute; any separation of elements that we make might be seen as artificial, at least in my opinion -

Per middle class taste, I did notice on a recent BET broadcast that a Kenny G performance had an audience made up primarily of appreciative African Americans -

Pick up the Al Haig - compiled from live recordings in California - if you can find it - has Sonny Criss and Chet Baker -

Nice to see a Dead thread here - I was enthusiastic early on for the Dead (late 1960s) but fell asleep for quite some time; I was partly turned off by Garcia's jazz attempts, which struck as student modalism - but when dealing with the music he knew and loved, he had a touch and feeling beyond compare in the rock world. Don't know if anyone has seen the film Festival Express, but it's a good testimony to the power of 1960s rock as wellas the Dead - Now I have a question - I saw the Dead at their Central park concert in 1967 and was wondering if anyone knows if any tapes exist of it -

Mike is one of those guys without which the research community would be in deep trouble - resourceful, ACCURATE, helpful and generous - and he has put up with my cranky posts on the Jazz Research line for some time now -

well, I like pudding, too - and to understand my cranky reaction to your post, you should realize that it was a bit insulting - and I've long been concerned by the fact that it's next to impossible to find a decent custard anymore -

"The very question on discerning between the aspects of feeling and intellect is rather nonsensical and though stale, yet somehow still sensational, but still silly in the end. Intuition cannot be parted, yet it is part feeling and part intellect. That does not mean there isn't pure intellect or pure feeling as well. All of this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand BTW." Spoken like someone who really only understands and considers these concepts in theory, but not in actual practice. Excuse me, but you might try reading through the ENTIRE thread - there has been much discussion on this, pertaining to Williams and the state of music pre-modern and post-modern. I was pointing out the mistake of calling certain modernists "intellectual" while considering their predecessors to be non- intellectual, which particlarly pertains in many discussions of jazz as an early music (say, pre-War) versus jazz as a modern music (say, post-War). And if the very question is nonsensical, why have you given it so much thought? Spare us the academic dialectics, please. These are the things that musicians and writers (in the real world) grapple with every day. And just as you can sometimes, at least theoretically, separate form and content, they are still, in their essence, aspects of each other.